Marco Ament was one of the original co-creators of tumblr, and then he left and developed Instapaper, a great tool for marking web pages you want to read later, including on a different device. Then he built a new app, an iPad magazine called THE MAGAZINE. You subscribe in the app and pay a small monthly fee, and original stories and articles are downloaded to your device weekly. The content is tech-leaning, but not in predictable ways. Like this story, about the science behind proving or disproving the effectiveness of red light cameras. The Magazine also features more women as writers than almost any tech publication or blog that I know of, which is an added bonus.

From the red light camera (RLC) article:

Orban’s son was lucky [suffering serious but not fatal injuries when a red light runner t-boned his car]. Around 800 people lose their lives each year in the United States as a result of drivers running red lights; those drivers also injure over 150,000 motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. Ninety-seven percent of Americans surveyed agree that red-light running represents a serious threat to road safety. Red-light cameras (RLCs) would seem to be the perfect solution. Installed at little cost, they punish red-light runners with traffic tickets, decrease the violation rate, and, usually, provide welcome income for cash-strapped local government. Across the country, about 530 communities in 24 states (plus DC) currently operate red-light cameras.

Advertisement

There’s only one problem, says Orban: “Research that’s correctly designed and constructed has concluded that red-light cameras increase crashes and injuries. They are actually adverse interventions.” Orban believes that the very technology that some claim could have prevented her son’s accident is not only ineffective at saving lives but might even be making our roads more dangerous.